If You Swerve to Avoid an Accident, Are You at Fault in Chicago?

It’s a moment every driver dreads: you’re cruising along a Chicago street when, suddenly, another car veers into your lane or slams on the brakes. You react instinctively—you swerve to avoid the car accident—only to hit a parked vehicle, collide with another car, or lose control altogether. Now you’re left wondering: If you swerve to avoid an accident, are you at fault?

The answer isn’t always clear-cut. Illinois law doesn’t automatically assign blame to the person who swerved, but whether you’re at fault depends heavily on the circumstances surrounding the incident. In this article, we’ll break down how fault is determined, what factors are considered, and when you may need help from a Chicago car accident attorney.

Understanding Fault and Negligence in Illinois Car Accidents

In Illinois, determining fault in a car accident revolves around the legal concept of negligence—that is, whether a driver failed to act reasonably under similar circumstances. The person who is found negligent is typically the one liable for the damages caused.

Fault plays a central role in any accident claim, as the insurance company or court must decide who caused the accident and who should pay. But in swerve accidents, this process becomes more nuanced, especially when no actual collision with the original hazard occurred, also known as a no-contact car accident.

Swerving to Avoid Hitting Another Vehicle: A Natural Reaction?

Swerving is often an instinctive, split-second response to a sudden danger. If another driver cuts you off, runs a red light, or merges without signaling, swerving may feel like the only option to avoid a car accident. Many drivers act out of fear or reflex to prevent what seems like an imminent crash.

In many cases, the person who swerved to avoid the collision is not the one who created the dangerous situation in the first place. But whether the swerve was legally justified or negligent depends on more than just intent.

Was the Swerve Considered a “Reasonable” Action Under the Circumstances?

Illinois law evaluates driver behavior based on the standard of a reasonable driver. When it comes to swerving, courts consider whether the action was justified given the circumstances. Key questions include:

• Was the danger real and immediate?
• Was the driver’s action the only way to avoid impact?
• Would a reasonable person have done the same thing?
• Was the swerve executed safely, considering traffic, road conditions, and visibility?

For example, swerving into oncoming traffic to avoid a minor pothole may be seen as an overreaction, while swerving to avoid a negligent driver running a stop sign may be viewed as reasonable.

The “Sudden Emergency” Doctrine in Illinois

Illinois recognizes a legal principle called the sudden emergency doctrine. This doctrine allows drivers to take quick action in response to unexpected, hazardous situations without being automatically held at fault, provided the emergency was not of their own making.

Under Illinois law, a driver may not be found negligent if:

• A sudden danger occurred,
• The danger was not caused by the driver’s own negligence,
• The driver acted in a way that was reasonable given the emergency.

So, if you swerved to avoid a crash caused by someone else’s reckless driving, this doctrine may apply and protect you from full liability.

Illinois Comparative Negligence Rules Explained

Even if the sudden emergency doctrine applies, Illinois follows a modified comparative negligence system (735 ILCS 5/2-1116). Under this rule, not just one driver, but multiple parties involved can share fault for an accident. You can recover damages only if you are found to be 50% or less at fault. Your compensation is then reduced by your percentage of fault.

For instance, if you’re found to be 30% at fault for swerving into another car, you can still receive 70% of your damages. But if you’re found more than 50% at fault, you’re barred from recovering anything.

How Comparative Negligence Impacts Swerving Accidents

In swerve accidents, comparative negligence often plays a crucial role. Suppose another driver ran a red light, forcing you to swerve and collide with a third vehicle. An investigation might assign:

• 60% fault to the red-light runner,
• 30% to you for swerving into traffic,
• 10% to the third driver for speeding.

In this scenario, your percentage of fault will directly impact your ability to seek compensation for medical bills, property damage, and other losses.

Factors Used to Establish Fault When a Driver Swerves

When determining fault in these cases, investigators examine many variables, including:

• Behavior of the other driver (e.g., speeding, texting, illegal turns)
• Whether the danger was visible and avoidable
• Driver’s actions before and during the swerve
• Speed of all vehicles
• Road conditions, weather, and visibility
• Surrounding traffic flow and density
• Any traffic violations (e.g., failure to yield, reckless driving)

Each factor helps determine whether the swerve was reasonable or whether the driver who swerved overreacted and created a new danger.

Crucial Evidence from the Accident Scene and Investigation

Because these cases often rely on split-second judgments, having strong evidence is critical. Useful documentation may include:

• Police reports detailing what happened and who was cited
• Photos or videos of the scene of the accident, including road conditions, skid marks, and vehicle positions
• Eyewitness testimony supporting your version of events
• Traffic or security camera footage
• Vehicle data recorders (black boxes), if available

The more evidence you have, the better your chances of proving that your driver behavior was reasonable and that another party’s negligence triggered your response.

Common Scenarios: Swerving to Avoid an Accident vs. Other Hazards

Here’s how different contexts may affect determining fault:

• Swerving to avoid a negligent driver: If another driver ran a red light or merged unsafely, and your swerve prevented a more serious crash, you may carry little or no fault.
• Swerving for small debris or animals: If the hazard was minor and a swerve created a bigger danger, investigators may find that your response was unreasonable.
• Swerving to avoid road hazards: If you swerved to avoid a pothole or road defect, liability could fall on a government entity like the City of Chicago. In these cases, strict deadlines apply under the Illinois Court of Claims Act and Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/).
• Swerving due to a “phantom driver”: In a phantom driver car accident, where the other vehicle never made contact and fled the scene, your uninsured motorist coverage may apply—but proving the phantom vehicle existed can be challenging without witnesses.

Can Swerving to Avoid One Accident Cause Another for Which You Are Liable?

Yes—this is a key point. If you swerved to avoid one accident but hit another car, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian, you may still be held partially or fully at fault.

Liability in these resulting collisions depends on whether your maneuver was the best choice under the circumstances. Courts will ask: Was braking safer? Did you maintain control? Did your decision increase danger for others?

If your swerve caused a more dangerous situation, you could be considered liable, especially if you failed to take other defensive driving techniques into account.

Legal Consequences if You Are Found Partially or Fully At Fault

If you’re found at fault after swerving to avoid a crash, you could face:

• Liability for medical expenses, lost income, and repairs for other drivers
• Responsibility for your own vehicle damage and injuries if your fault is 51% or more
• Increased auto insurance premiums
• Traffic citations under the Illinois Vehicle Code for unsafe maneuvers or reckless driving

In some cases, you may also lose your right to file an insurance claim for your own damages, depending on your share of fault.

Why You Need an Experienced Chicago Car Accident Lawyer

Because Illinois uses comparative negligence and recognizes the sudden emergency doctrine, swerve-related accidents require detailed legal analysis. An experienced Chicago personal injury lawyer understands how to prove that your actions were reasonable, how to establish liability, and how to protect your rights in a personal injury claim.

Your personal injury lawyer can also communicate with the insurance company, negotiate a fair settlement, and help file a lawsuit if necessary. Without experienced legal representation, you risk being unfairly blamed for an accident you tried to prevent.

So, if you’ve been involved in a car accident, make sure to seek immediate medical attention, gather the contact details of any witnesses and the other driver, and then book a free consultation with our legal team.

How Our Accident Attorney Team Helps Prove Fault

At Rosenfeld Injury Law, we understand that every swerve accident is different. Our legal team:

• Investigates the full circumstances leading to the accident
• Gathers physical evidence and works with reconstruction experts
• Secures eyewitness testimony and traffic camera footage
• Examines all insurance coverage options for compensation
• Builds a legal argument under Illinois’s traffic laws and negligence standards
• Helps establish liability by proving that your actions were reasonable and that the other driver’s actions caused the chain of events

Whether you need to file a claim, defend against a citation, or seek compensation, we’ll fight for the best outcome possible.

Contact Us for a Free Consultation to Discuss Your Case

If you’ve swerved to avoid an accident and were involved in a collision as a result, don’t guess your way through the legal process. Let a skilled personal injury attorney in Chicago evaluate your case and explain your rights.

Your case may depend on how quickly you act, what evidence you preserve, and how well your version of events is presented. Let us help you protect your future. Call our legal team at (888) 424-5757 or fill out our online form to take legal action today.

All content undergoes thorough legal review by experienced attorneys, including Jonathan Rosenfeld. With 25 years of experience in personal injury law and over 100 years of combined legal expertise within our team, we ensure that every article is legally accurate, compliant, and reflects current legal standards.